Nominations for Worst Drivers in Austin (photo radar, vehicles, radio)

[mimimomx3]

Originally Posted by austinaggie

Once AGAIN, IF and this is IF you are impeding traffic you are not a law abiding person in that situation just as a person speeding is NOT a law abiding person. And yes, people have been and will be cited for impeding traffic. It is against the law just as speeding is. It is not difficult to understand.

Sorry, I can't see that going 65 miles an hour is impeding traffic.

[austinaggie]

Originally Posted by mimimomx3

Sorry, I can't see that going 65 miles an hour is impeding traffic.

I've said it before and I'll say it again as some just can't seem to grasp the concept. I NEVER said that going 65 miles hour was impeding the flow traffic but in certain situations it certainly could be. I have a novel idea-how about you drive the way YOU want to and I'll drive the way I want to. I will just pray that if you don't want to move over when some jerk is tailgateing you that the same jerk does not get pissed off at you and cut me off in my lane in an attempt to pass you thus causing me to slam on my brakes possibly causing an accident.

[iceshots]

[quote=Cardiff Giant;9631477]
The worst drivers are the non-signalers. C'mon, is using your blinker that difficult? It's a matter of courtesy to other drivers.
quote]

I thought installing those things were optional these days.

At least I figure they are, since the more expensive the car, the more they seem to come with non-functional turn signals.

[mimimomx3]

Originally Posted by austinaggie

I've said it before and I'll say it again as some just can't seem to grasp the concept. I NEVER said that going 65 miles hour was impeding the flow traffic but in certain situations it certainly could be. I have a novel idea-how about you drive the way YOU want to and I'll drive the way I want to. I will just pray that if you don't want to move over when some jerk is tailgateing you that the same jerk does not get pissed off at you and cut me off in my lane in an attempt to pass you thus causing me to slam on my brakes possibly causing an accident.

I'll say it again. If the sign says 65, I'm driving 65. Let the chips fall where they may.

[TexasHorseLady]

Okay, here's a question for those of you who are on the "the person not speeding is the one with the problem" bench.

What does the phrase "speed limit" mean to you? Is it something optional, or is it the law?

Maybe if we get that defined, we'll come closer to a mutual understanding.

To be fair, I'll go first. My definition is, the speed limit is the limit on how fast you can legally drive on a given stretch of road. If you are driving faster than that, you are breaking the law, period.

If you are driving slower than that limit, you should be in the right lane if there is other traffic on the road that is driving the speed limit. If you are driving the speed limit, you can be in any lane you wish, because you should be the fastest vehicle on the road.

Note that, as I've said repeatedly, if there is someone breaking the law by speeding, you should likely move over and let them make a fool of themselves, while praying that they don't take out some innocent family in the process. But the definition, to me, of speed limit is the speed over which no one driving on that road is to go. Any arguments about "flow of traffic" must take that speed limit into account, because the "flow of traffic" should not be going any faster than the legal speed limit. (Note I said, "Should be," because we're talking legal definitions here.)
How about you?

[Moekazi]

I love these arguments where people keep tossing out Red Herrings which confuses a very simple topic. It's entertaining. Although i hope it's just trolling as the alternative would be very disappointing.

"What if i'm passing someone and some racer wannabe comes flying up behind me?" Well, i guess that means you didn't check to if it was safe to pass. Unless there's a huge difference in speed, you can see them coming if you look. Just try to say they're coming up too fast for you to see them. I dare ya.

"Oh, but they tailgate me and honk their horns. They're so mean and rude." Um, so what? Just because someone is mean and rude that doesn't mean they have different laws.

"If i'm going the speed limit, i'm not doing anything wrong." Yes, you are. The law clearly places the responsibility on the slower the traffic. It directs them to move right. It doesn't direct the faster traffic to do anything. There is NO responsibility given to the faster traffic regardless of any other laws being broken at the time. They could be speeding, smoking joints, and drinking beer while texting. The only law that's of concern is the one stipulating that faster traffic must pass on the left...which YOU are impeding. If the faster traffic was responsible we'd have a "faster traffic must yield to slower traffic" law.

The argument that the faster traffic is at fault is like blaming someone for going uphill. They're creating the situation where the downhill traffic needs to yield, but it's the downhill traffic's responsibility to move. Yes, even if the uphill traffic is speeding uphill.

Oh, and i really love the "If i'm sitting in my own lane minding my business doing the speed limit than i'm not creating a problem." It's not you. It never is. Everyone else has a problem. hehehe. I bet you say that a lot.

With that, i'm out of this thread. If you don't get it by now, you aren't going to any time soon. I've got better ways to waste my time.

[atxcio]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Okay, here's a question for those of you who are on the "the person not speeding is the one with the problem" bench.

What does the phrase "speed limit" mean to you? Is it something optional, or is it the law?

I think what is more telling could be, why do you feel it necessary to keep reminding us of the law? Do you think anyone is disputing that speeding is illegal? Nothing is wrong with reminders, but your vehemence regarding this subject suggests you may be just the type of driver we are worried about -- one that drives with some sense that they are de facto law enforcement.

Maybe you will answer this question honestly: Have you EVER stayed in the left lane (even when the right lane was open) with the intent to "teach a lesson" to the driver behind you? Or, have you camped out in the left lane as a number of cars stack up behind you, to "remind" them that the speed limit is 65 and that they should all just be patient and wait behind you? Be truthful now.

I can tell you this, if I do drive 5-10 mph over the speed limit, it's not because I'm trying to teach anyone a lesson or prove anything to them, nor am I intentionally trying to impede traffic. However, if you are camping out in the left lane, with the right lane open and not moving over for faster traffic... then you are intentionally trying to impede traffic. And it doesn't only affect me, it can cause tieups well beyond the point of the obstruction. It can impede emergency vehicle traffic you may not even be aware of. And for no legitimate purpose whatsoever.

[love roses]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Okay, here's a question for those of you who are on the "the person not speeding is the one with the problem" bench.

What does the phrase "speed limit" mean to you? Is it something optional, or is it the law?

Maybe if we get that defined, we'll come closer to a mutual understanding.

To be fair, I'll go first. My definition is, the speed limit is the limit on how fast you can legally drive on a given stretch of road. If you are driving faster than that, you are breaking the law, period.

If you are driving slower than that limit, you should be in the right lane if there is other traffic on the road that is driving the speed limit. If you are driving the speed limit, you can be in any lane you wish, because you should be the fastest vehicle on the road.

Note that, as I've said repeatedly, if there is someone breaking the law by speeding, you should likely move over and let them make a fool of themselves, while praying that they don't take out some innocent family in the process. But the definition, to me, of speed limit is the speed over which no one driving on that road is to go. Any arguments about "flow of traffic" must take that speed limit into account, because the "flow of traffic" should not be going any faster than the legal speed limit. (Note I said, "Should be," because we're talking legal definitions here.)
How about you?

Spot on

[love roses]

"If i'm going the speed limit, i'm not doing anything wrong." Yes, you are. The law clearly places the responsibility on the slower the traffic. It directs them to move right. It doesn't direct the faster traffic to do anything. There is NO responsibility given to the faster traffic regardless of any other laws being broken at the time. They could be speeding, smoking joints, and drinking beer while texting. The only law that's of concern is the one stipulating that faster traffic must pass on the left...which YOU are impeding. If the faster traffic was responsible we'd have a "faster traffic must yield to slower traffic" law.


Well, pardon a moi....

[love roses]

With that, i'm out of this thread. If you don't get it by now, you aren't going to any time soon. I've got better ways to waste my time.


Like tailgating slow people?